• [long]Hidden dimensions could explain where mass comes from

    From ram@ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) to rec.arts.sf.written on Tue Jan 6 17:56:36 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    If there is a better newsgroup for posting AI-generated SF stories,
    please let me know.

    A physics newsgroup had this subject recently, "Hidden dimensions
    could explain where mass comes from", so I asked the chatbot to
    write a story where mass is brought to our universe from a hidden
    dimension. It came out much longer than I expected!

    The story is much better and more consistent than stories I generated
    few months ago. The paragraph wrapping with American hyphenation
    (intended) was done by a Python script I wrote recently.

    The Smugglers of Weight

    In the Archive of Forbidden Experiments, no one spoke above a whisper.

    It was not that the Archivists feared being overheard. The Archive
    floated in a sealed band of the Fifth Stratum, buffered from causal
    winds, inaccessible to anything that did not know its exact equations.
    It was habit, more than anything else. When you spent millennia cata-
    loging things that could end realities, you learned to be quiet around
    them.

    Rhalin stood before Vault 7-Nu, hands folded behind his back, eyes
    on the shimmering seal: a circular frame of equations suspended in the
    air, turning slowly like a halo of frozen lightning. He had read its designation dozens of times before, but the glyphs still felt wrong in
    his mind.

    EXPERIMENT 7-NU
    CONTROLLED BREACH INTO A NULL-METRIC CONTEXT
    STATUS: PERMANENTLY RESTRICTED

    "You are staring at it again," Siva said.

    Her voice sounded small under the vaulted ceiling. She perched on
    a nearby observation ledge, long limbs folded, a set of spectral in-
    terfaces hovering over her right shoulder. Where Rhalin's body kept to
    an old, mostly physical form - bones, ligaments, nervous tissue inter-
    laced with computation - Siva's was already drifting toward a more ab-
    stract geometry. Her outline blurred slightly at the edges, like she was
    always half a thought away from vanishing.

    Rhalin did not look away from the seal. "We have models of the
    Fifth Stratum's birth," he said. "Simulations of collision cascades in
    nascent topologies. We have a reconstruction of the Second Cataclysm.
    But this one . . ."

    "This one never started," Siva finished. "That is the point."

    Rhalin exhaled. "A universe with no mass."

    "More precisely," Siva said, "a universe with no rest mass, no con- densates, no localized excitations. Metric but empty. It admits a coor-
    dinate description. It has extension, topology, and a definable causal structure. But nothing alters it, not from within. There are no clocks
    inside it because nothing can tick. You could wait there 'forever' and
    never know that you had."

    Rhalin frowned. "You cannot wait if there is nothing to wait with."

    "Exactly," Siva said, sounding pleased. "So we do the waiting out
    here."

    She gestured, and a translucent model unfolded between them: a fab-
    ric of pale lines stretching to infinity, with no features, no knots, no fluctuations - only an austere, static grid.

    "This is the target manifold," she said. "Mathematically complete. Physically . . . inert."

    Rhalin studied it with a mixture of awe and discomfort. "Who made
    it?"

    "That is not recorded," Siva said. "The file begins with its dis-
    covery. Someone in the Third Unity probed deep configuration space,
    found this null-metric context, and realized it was stable. Nearly
    everyone agreed to leave it alone. A perfectly empty canvas is tempting,
    but also dangerous."

    "So why does the Archive have a breach protocol written for it?"
    Rhalin asked.

    "Because not everyone agreed," Siva said quietly. "A coalition of
    boundary theorists - my predecessors, in a way - proposed an experiment. In- sertion of an external invariant into a null field. A seed that could
    not be expressed as a solution of the empty equations."

    "Mass," Rhalin said.

    "Mass," Siva confirmed. "A property that binds geometry to itself,
    that persuades paths to curve. The one thing that universe was guaran-
    teed never to produce on its own."

    Rhalin finally turned to her. "You called me here because you want
    to unseal 7-Nu."

    Siva held his gaze. "I called you here because the Council has al-
    ready voted to. Under conditions. With you and me as primary custodians.
    The breach will be narrow, the insertion minimal, the monitoring ultra-
    fine. We will not disturb the manifold more than a single deviation from perfect emptiness."

    "What kind of deviation?" Rhalin asked.

    "A single primitive," Siva said. "The simplest persistent concen-
    tration of energy that can stand in for mass under our interface rules.
    A 'particle,' in their language. The smallest thing that can curve the
    canvas and thereby write a history into it."

    Rhalin looked back at the seal. "And if it cascades? If one seed
    becomes a storm of structure and we corrupt the manifold beyond recogni-
    tion?"

    Siva's smile was brief and unreadable. "Then we will have answered
    one of the oldest questions of the Fifth Stratum. We will know whether emptiness is the final word, or just the initial condition awaiting a contraband ingredient."

    "You speak like a smuggler," Rhalin said.

    "We are smugglers," Siva replied. "We are about to smuggle weight
    into a place that has never known it."

    The Gate to Nowhere

    They convened in the lower chamber of the Archive: a spherical hall, its
    inner surface lined with silent observers. Some projected only as sil- houettes. Others appeared as complex glyphs or collections of orbiting
    shapes. All were members of the Oversight Assembly, attending remotely
    through securely entangled channels.

    In the center of the chamber floated the Gate.

    It was not a gate in any ordinary sense. It resembled a closed loop
    of darkness, a ring whose circumference was defined not by light but by
    the absence of it. The space within the ring did not match the space be-
    hind it: looking through, one saw only a perfect, featureless gray, nei-
    ther bright nor dim, not quite surface and not quite volume.

    "This is the interface," Siva told Rhalin as they took their posi-
    tions on the primary control dais. "A topological embedding that identi-
    fies a codimension-one boundary between our stratum and the null-metric context. On our side, time flows. On the other side . . ."

    She did not finish. She did not need to.

    Rhalin's instruments showed none of the usual hum of cross-brane
    activity. No leakage, no ghost modes, not even vacuum fluctuations. The
    other side of the Gate was not hostile. It was simply not doing anything
    at all.

    "It feels wrong," he murmured.

    "Your intuitions are calibrated on worlds with content," Siva said
    gently. "This is a world with form but no content. A stage without ac-
    tors, props, or audience. Even the dust motes never learned to fall, be-
    cause there are no motes and no falling."

    Rhalin shivered. "And we are about to introduce the first thing
    that can move."

    He brought up the seed configuration.

    The seed looked unimpressive: a localized packet of constrained en-
    ergy defined on their side of the Gate, shaped by a carefully tuned set
    of boundary conditions. In itself, it was ordinary. Their universe - that
    is, the Fifth Stratum - manufactured and manipulated such packets con-
    stantly.

    What made this seed different was how it would be interpreted when
    it crossed.

    "In our frame," Siva said, "this is just a stable excitation of the substrate. In the null-metric context, the same object appears as an in- trinsic curvature source. Its presence alters the geometry. Once embed-
    ded, its 'rest' state corresponds to a constant curvature defect. The
    manifold can no longer remain the trivial solution it was."

    Rhalin checked the safeguards again: containment thresholds, kill-
    switch commands, rollback protocols. They could not erase whatever his-
    tory might develop in the null universe - it would unfold microsecond by microsecond from their perspective, but from that universe's internal
    viewpoint it would simply be a series of states, each defined by the
    previous one. However, they could cut the interface, isolate the mani-
    fold, and prevent further influence.

    "You understand," intoned one of the Assembly members, speaking
    through the glyph of a slowly turning polyhedron, "that once you insert
    the seed, internal time becomes meaningful. The manifold will have a be-
    fore and an after. You will have defined its first asymmetry."

    "Yes," Rhalin said. "We also understand that nothing inside will
    remember the before. There is no mark to carry across. Whatever arises
    from the seed will perceive a universe that 'always' has mass, because
    mass is present in every moment they can reference."

    "Do not speak of 'they' yet," another observer said, a flickering
    band of light along the chamber wall. "There are no observers inside.
    Not now."

    Siva inclined her head. "We will confine personhood to our side.
    The null context receives only the seed and whatever it entails by its
    own laws."

    "And if structure emerges?" the light-band asked.

    "Then we will watch," Siva said. "From outside. Without interfer-
    ence, unless the Assembly votes otherwise."

    The polyhedron glowed faintly. "Proceed."

    Smuggling the First Weight

    The Gate grew darker as they prepared the transfer, its boundary humming
    with equations. Rhalin felt the familiar slip of distances losing their ordinary meaning near the interface. Coordinate axes bent and straight-
    ened again as the Gate's embedding adjusted to match the null universe's metric. The sense of wrongness became sharper, a quiet ache just behind
    his eyes.

    There was nothing on the far side to receive them. No field, no
    lattice of interactions. The manifold was a solution of the bare equa-
    tions, perfectly uniform and static. The Gate aligned with that immobil-
    ity like a glove fitting over no hand at all.

    Siva's voice sounded in his private channel. "On my mark, you will
    release the seed into the interface. Once it crosses, our side will no
    longer fully describe its behavior. The manifold will contribute to its evolution."

    "I am ready," Rhalin said.

    "Three," Siva said softly. "Two. One."

    Rhalin released the constraints.

    The seed slipped into the Gate like a bead into still water, leav-
    ing no ripple on their side. The instruments registered a transient
    spike as its description transferred reference frames. For a moment,
    there was a double accounting: the seed belonged to both their universe
    and the null context, halfway between interpretation schemes.

    Then it crossed.

    Rhalin saw no flash, no burst of energy. But every metric sensor
    tied to the Gate screamed the same message in stark, clean numbers:

    The manifold was no longer a trivial solution.

    A localized deviation had appeared on the far side of the Gate - a
    point where the geometry bent inward, where geodesics that would once
    have run parallel now converged. The empty grid on their display re-
    shaped itself around the new flaw, lines dipping toward it as if ac- knowledging a leader.

    On the most primitive visualization, it looked almost like a dimple
    in a taut sheet. The perfect featureless expanse now had a single dent.

    Siva smiled, wonder and relief warring on her face. "We did it,"
    she breathed. "The seed persists. The manifold accepts it."

    Rhalin watched the readouts as internal time began to tick - not for
    them, but as a sequence of identifiably distinct states in the null con-
    text. The presence of curvature defined a way to distinguish one slice
    of the manifold from another. There were now geodesics that approached
    the curvature center, geodesics that had approached in the past, and ge- odesics that would approach in the future.

    Nothing else existed there yet. No fields, no composites, no chem-
    istry. Only geometry and one stubborn, irreducible sink in that geome-
    try.

    "Is it stable?" the polyhedron asked.

    "For now," Siva said. "The equations show no immediate decay chan-
    nel. It sits. It bends."

    "That is all?" the light-band asked.

    "For the moment," Rhalin said.

    But it would not be all for long.

    Cascades

    The first surprise came quickly - "quickly" meaning a few microseconds
    on their side, an arbitrarily large stretch of ordered slices on the
    other.

    "We are seeing secondary fluctuations," Rhalin said, staring at the changing displays. "Metric perturbations propagating outward from the
    seed. Weak, but coherent."

    Siva nodded, eyes bright. "Expected. The manifold is adjusting. The presence of localized curvature means the trivial solution is no longer globally stable. Modes that were once pure gauge become physical. They
    are shaking themselves into reality."

    Rhalin watched as a pattern of standing waves emerged: oscillations
    of the geometry itself, ringing like a struck bell around the seed-dim-
    ple. Some of those waves folded back on themselves, forming loops of
    curvature that detached and drifted.

    "Those," Siva said, pointing, "are gravity waves in their language. Ripples in the fabric. Not yet particles, not yet matter, but structure. Differences between here and there."

    "It looks . . ." Rhalin hesitated.

    "Alive?" Siva suggested.

    "Restless," he decided. "Like a medium that just discovered it can
    do something besides obey the simplest equation."

    The waves did not remain just waves.

    As they propagated, the manifold's nonlinearities began to do their
    work. In regions where waves intersected constructively, curvature
    spiked, briefly reaching thresholds that triggered new stable defects.
    Tiny, additional dimples appeared, much smaller than the first but still persistent, dotting the once featureless expanse.

    "More seeds," Rhalin said in awe. "Self-generated."

    "Not seeds," Siva said. "Condensates. The manifold is discovering
    its own catalogue of allowed localized structures now that perfect uni-
    formity has been broken. In our terms, these are emergent excitation-
    s - quanta with properties defined by the manifold's symmetries."

    "Particles," Rhalin said. "We gave them mass, and mass is breeding
    more."

    "It is more subtle," Siva said. "The original seed defines a scale. Against that scale, the manifold can distinguish heavy from light, sta-
    ble from unstable. It is establishing a menu of possibilities."

    The Assembly watched in silence as the process unfolded. They ac- celerated their monitoring, compressing more and more internal time into
    each unit of their own.

    The null universe blossomed with complexity.

    Where there had once been nothing but static geometry, there were
    now propagating modes: waves that carried curvature, waves that carried
    phase relations, waves that, under certain conditions, combined into
    more stable lumps. Collections of excitations began interacting, scat-
    tering, exchanging energy. Conservation laws emerged as natural book-
    keeping rules, invariants under the manifold's symmetries.

    At first, it was all radiation - fleeting, racing, a crowded dance of disturbances across the newborn cosmos. But not perfectly so. In certain
    zones, configurations settled into longer-lived arrangements, clumping
    into denser knots of curvature, their trajectories mutually bending as
    they passed.

    "There," Siva said, highlighting a region. "Self-bound states. Ag- gregates. Mass attracting mass."

    "Their gravity," Rhalin whispered.

    He noticed something else: the effective temperature of the uni-
    verse - defined from their outside vantage point as the average energy
    level of the excitations - was dropping. Expansion had emerged as a natur-
    al solution: the manifold's metric was stretching, the distances between
    large aggregates increasing over time.

    "How does it expand?" he asked. "What sets the initial drift?"

    "The same seed we smuggled," Siva said. "The presence of mass de-
    fines a preferred class of solutions. Balance between curvature and void
    leads not to staticity but flow. To maintain consistency, the manifold
    must allow its own scale to change. Expansion is the cheapest way for it
    to do so."

    The more the universe expanded, the more its contents cooled, and
    the richer the structures became. Networks of bound aggregates formed,
    dances of orbiting clumps. New classes of excitations condensed in the
    cooler, denser pockets: fields that could lock into different states,
    each state defining a different "phase" of the vacuum.

    Rhalin saw phase transitions ripple through the cosmos like weather
    fronts across an ocean. In each cooled pocket, some symmetry broke, and
    new effective rules emerged for the excitations inside.

    Most patterns were fleeting, never stabilizing into anything long-
    lived. But a few . . . a few endured.

    "One region," Siva said, isolating a tiny patch that, once magni-
    fied, revealed hundreds of millions of interacting knots, "is particu-
    larly interesting. The local parameters there - density, curvature, post- transition vacuum states - allow for complex, metastable arrangements. Composite structures of composites."

    "Chemistry," Rhalin said, hardly daring to name it.

    "Not yet," Siva said. "But close. Give it more internal time."

    The Turning of Scales

    As the Assembly debated observation ethics in high-speed parallel chan-
    nels, Rhalin and Siva fell into a steady rhythm: watch, analyze, anno-
    tate, extrapolate. For many of their own days, they skimmed through eons
    of the null universe's internal history.

    Nothing moved on their side but eyes and hands. On the other side, everything moved.

    The cosmic radiation thinned. First-generation bound aggre-
    gates - what, in that universe's own eventual language, might be called
    "stars" - ignited, burned, and died in showers of newly-formed heavy ex- citations. The death of these aggregates seeded their surroundings with ingredients for more complex clumps: a periodic table of emergent kinds,
    each with characteristic binding behaviors.

    "This region," Siva said, zooming in farther, "has developed arrays
    of stable, small-scale bound structures. Their interactions are weak
    enough to allow intricate configurations before decay. Note the temper-
    atures, the pressures. These are conditions under which complexity can
    sustain itself, not just flash and vanish."

    Rhalin watched as one particular bound aggregate cooled, its sur-
    face hardening into a crust of tightly-linked composites. More aggre-
    gates orbited it, some breaking apart and raining additional materi-
    al down. The crust fractured, melted, cooled again. Cycles established themselves: solid, liquid, gas, each state reorganizing the same set of constituents in different patterns.

    "We should name that world," Rhalin said, before catching himself.
    "No. That would be premature."

    Siva tilted her head. "Names are our tools, not theirs. They will
    name what they need to name, from their side. We name only for our own understanding."

    "We," Rhalin repeated. "We."

    It struck him then how lopsided this relationship was. From the perspective of the nascent cosmos, no external voices existed. There was
    only what its laws permitted, what its history wrote into its fabric.
    From their perspective, they had started all of it with a single illicit transfer of mass.

    "We are on every page of their unwritten history," he said softly,
    "and yet we do not appear in the story at all."

    "That is the elegance of the design," Siva replied. "We do not in-
    trude. We altered only the boundary condition at the beginning - intro-
    duced mass into a massless form. Everything since then has followed from
    that single break in the symmetry."

    "Does that make us creators?" he asked.

    She considered. "We are smugglers. We carried a forbidden good
    across a border. Creation is what the manifold is doing with what we
    smuggled."

    They watched the crusted world for a long while.

    Eventually, there came a phase when its surface was covered by liq-
    uid, its atmosphere dense with reactive composites. Lightning played
    across its skies, waves crashed against emergent continents, cycles of evaporation and condensation turned the surface into a restless labora-
    tory.

    In shallow basins and deep vents, chains formed.

    At first, they were simple patterns: repeating substructures, occa- sionally branching, occasionally forming rings. Then some chains devel-
    oped the ability to catalyze their own extension, using other composites
    as feedstock. Feedback loops emerged, not by miracle but by relentless combinatorics and filtering.

    Most such loops died quickly. A few persisted. They templated their
    own pattern into their surroundings, copying with varying fidelity. En- vironments changed; only loops compatible with those changes endured.

    In the language of the Fifth Stratum, this was information taking
    hold of matter.

    "They are beginning to compute," Siva said. "Their world is learn-
    ing to store and process its own description."

    "Not 'they'," Rhalin corrected, though without conviction. "Not
    yet. Call it a pre-'they' phase."

    Siva smiled. "Very well. The substrate is rehearsing the future
    plural."

    The First Questions

    Time passed for the watchers. Inside, eras turned.

    Chains of composites folded into intricate three-dimensional
    shapes. Networks of those chains formed enclosed systems: entities that exported entropy to maintain internal order. Some networks became adept
    at exploiting particular gradients - thermal, chemical, radiative. They multiplied, diversified, and competed.

    Eventually, the observers' instruments recorded something qualita-
    tively new: patterns of interaction whose persistence depended not just
    on physical structure but on abstract relationships. Correlations echoed
    over distances, repeated in different mediums, copied not as matter but
    as arrangement.

    In one narrow band of surface on the crusted world, self-sustain-
    ing networks of networks had formed: entities with internal models of
    their environment, however rudimentary. They sensed, reacted, predicted.
    Their continued existence depended on the accuracy of their tiny antici- pations.

    Rhalin watched one such network - a flexible, mobile construct that
    swam through the world's liquid, seeking gradients to exploit. He ob-
    served how its internal state changed when it encountered something new,
    how it adjusted its behavior accordingly.

    "It's building an internal representation," he said. "Very sim-
    ple, but still - a map that is not the territory, influencing how it moves through the territory."

    "Here the story becomes delicate," Siva said. "If we choose to de-
    scribe their universe in terms of stories, we must remember those sto-
    ries are ours, not theirs."

    "You want us to stay clinical," Rhalin said. "To call this a dynam-
    ical system undergoing state transitions, not a creature experiencing anything."

    Siva shrugged. "Both frames are valid, depending on purpose. Today
    we are guardians of an experiment. One day, perhaps, we will be witness-
    es to interrogators of their own reality."

    The mobile constructs multiplied, diversified, and elaborated fur-
    ther. Some developed specialized sub-networks sensitive to particular
    signals: light, vibration, chemical gradients. Others evolved longer-
    term state retention - memory in their own idiom.

    A line was crossed when some assemblies began to react not only to
    the immediate environment but to patterns unfolding over intervals they
    could not sense all at once. They inferred. They began to behave as if
    the world extended far beyond their immediate reach.

    "When does it qualify as a mind?" Rhalin asked aloud.

    The Assembly, still watching, did not answer. It was not their
    role.

    When the crusted world cooled and complex life staggered onto the
    surfaces of its continents, under a sky streaked with the light of near-
    by aggregates, Rhalin felt something like paternal anxiety.

    One lineage of surface-walkers developed manipulative appendages
    and stereoscopic vision. They learned to coordinate in groups, to trans-
    mit strategies socially rather than genetically. Their behaviors became increasingly flexible, their internal models increasingly deep.

    They learned to shape their environment intentionally.

    Fire was harnessed; tools were made and used; shelters constructed.
    Sounds took on stable associations. A fetus of language quickened.

    Siva slowed the observation rate.

    "They are beginning to record their thought," she said. "When that happens, layers of description stack. The manifold realizes that it can
    be reflected upon itself from inside."

    The walkers spread, diversified, and organized themselves into
    bands, then settlements, then networks of settlements. They told one an-
    other stories about why the world was the way it was. They peopled their
    sky with intentions, their storms with moods, their disasters with mean-
    ing.

    "Notice," Siva said, "how quickly they invent explanations that
    point beyond what they can observe."

    "They are uncomfortable with unbounded ignorance," Rhalin said.

    "So are we," Siva replied. "That is why we built gates."

    The walkers eventually gave themselves a name for their kind. They
    named their world, their sky, their lights above. They began to formal-
    ize patterns in the way things moved: first as rules of thumb, then as mathematical relationships.

    On one night in particular, Rhalin watched a cluster of them stand
    atop a rocky outcrop, gazing upward. One of them scratched marks into a
    flat surface, carefully recording positions of lights in the sky rela-
    tive to their horizon.

    "Tracking cycles," Siva murmured. "Seeing regularity in the chaos."

    "In the pattern," Rhalin corrected. "It was never chaos to begin
    with. It was always lawful, from the first curvature deviation outward."

    Siva glanced at him. "It was law plus smuggling."

    The Edge of Awareness

    They could not listen to the walkers' internal monologues; the Gate
    did not pass minds, only aggregated descriptors. But they could infer
    mental content from behavior with increasing accuracy.

    "They have discovered the notion of 'before,'" Siva said at one
    point, pointing to a series of painted surfaces in a subterranean cham-
    ber. The paintings showed simple figures, arranged in sequences: an an-
    imal hunted, killed, carried. The last figure in the series was absent,
    implied by the others.

    "They understand sequence," Rhalin said. "One thing leads to anoth-
    er."

    "More," Siva said. "Some of their marks no longer correspond to
    visible things at all. Look here - this pattern recurs in many surfaces, associated with particular gatherings or arrangements of objects. It is
    a sign detached from immediate referent. They are learning to anchor in- visible things to visible symbols."

    Rhalin watched as, centuries later in their time, those symbols
    evolved into full writing: structured systems for encoding speech, law,
    memory. Once that threshold was passed, the walkers' capacity to accumu-
    late knowledge exploded. Each generation started a little further along
    an invisible ramp.

    They built instruments to extend their senses. Lenses to magnify,
    tubes to collect faint light, devices to count and compare with inhuman precision. They developed formal methods for checking their own intu-
    itions against the world.

    "Science," Rhalin said.

    Siva nodded. "They are beginning to interrogate the manifold with
    its own behavior. They will try to derive how the canvas works, from the inside."

    "Do we let them see us?" Rhalin asked, half-joking.

    Her expression turned sharp. "We are outside their causal closure
    by design. Our interference would destroy the integrity of the experi-
    ment. If they infer the existence of external strata, let it be by log-
    ic, not by intrusion on our part."

    "Still," Rhalin said quietly, "somewhere in their theories there
    may be a term that corresponds, however faintly, to us."

    Siva let the idea hang.

    The walkers refined their models of motion and force. They discov-
    ered that the same rules that made stones fall governed the dance of
    the lights in the sky. They realized that the entire cosmos around them
    could be described by a small set of equations, if those equations were
    read correctly.

    At last, a conceptual revolution unfolded in one of their cultures.
    A thinker proposed that what they experienced as an attractive force
    might instead be geometry: matter telling space how to curve, curvature
    telling matter how to move.

    Rhalin stared at the formalism they developed over the next few
    centuries. The walkers wrote down a set of equations that, in their own
    limited notation, bore a striking resemblance to the ones Siva had shown
    him when describing the null-metric context.

    "They are reconstructing their own manifold's rules," he said, awe- struck.

    Siva smiled softly. "From inside. With no knowledge of the Gate, no
    notion of the smuggled seed, they still arrive at descriptions consis-
    tent with what we see from outside. That is the power of invariants."

    Another thinker, in another place and time, proposed something even stranger: that mass and energy were interchangeable, two aspects of the
    same underlying quantity. That what they called 'rest mass' might be
    frozen motion, and that all of it participated in shaping the geometry.

    Rhalin thought of the seed they had sent through.

    "We gave them mass," he said. "And now they are learning to name
    it."

    "Which means," Siva said, "they are now one conceptual step away
    from confronting the question: why does mass exist at all?"

    "They will not answer it solely from their frame," the light-band
    from the Assembly said, speaking up for the first time in many subjec-
    tive millennia. "The presence of mass in their universe is a boundary condition, not derivable from their internal dynamics. They may deduce
    that their laws allow a zero-mass solution, a truly empty universe. And
    then they may wonder why they do not inhabit that one."

    Rhalin felt a strange tightness in his chest. "They might imagine a universe like the one we found - the null-metric context - and realize they could have lived in featureless static. Then ask why they instead live
    in this . . ."

    "Story," Siva supplied.

    "Yes," Rhalin said. "This story, full of structure and change."

    The Forbidden Mirror

    Eventually, one of the walkers' civilizations learned to manipulate
    energy at scales large enough to probe the deepest layers of their own substrate. They built machines that smashed their smallest known con-
    stituents together at tremendous speeds, momentarily recreating condi-
    tions from their universe's youth.

    From the debris, they inferred additional symmetries and fields.
    They wrote down a more complete set of equations. Some of them realized
    that those equations admitted a solution with no mass terms at all: a
    universe in which none of the mechanisms that gave rest mass to excita-
    tions had ever turned on.

    Rhalin watched as a group of them gathered in a conference hall,
    arguing fiercely over chalkboards covered in symbols.

    "They have discovered your empty canvas," Siva murmured.

    "Not mine," Rhalin said. "Ours."

    He listened to their arguments through the translations of his in- struments. One of them said: "If the symmetry-breaking parameters had
    different values - if the vacuum had chosen another state - we would have no massive particles. No atoms. No chemistry. No life. The universe would
    be a lifeless bath of radiation forever."

    "Or worse," another said, "it might have been stuck in a completely
    static configuration. No fluctuations, no evolution. Just nothing hap-
    pening, for all eternity."

    Someone joked about "the universe that never got interesting," and
    they laughed uneasily.

    "They are staring at the border of their own origin story," Siva
    said. "Some of them are beginning to ask why those parameters took the
    values they did. Why their vacuum is in this state and not another."

    One thinker proposed a multiverse: countless manifolds with differ-
    ent parameter choices, most sterile, a few hospitable. Another suggested
    deeper principles that might select for structure. A third defaulted to:
    "It is simply given. Asking 'why' is meaningless."

    Rhalin smiled wistfully. "They are circling the fact that their re-
    ality started with an asymmetry. A deviation. A smuggled seed."

    "And yet," Siva said, "none of their theories will ever require us.
    They can remain self-contained. From their vantage, it is enough that
    mass exists. How it entered the equations is not accessible to them em- pirically."

    "Still," Rhalin said, "there is something . . . poignant, watching them imagine a universe without mass. They think of it as a thought exper-
    iment, a ghost reality. They do not realize that their 'ghost' is more
    real to us than they are, because we saw it as an actual manifold before
    we altered it."

    "You speak as if you regret it," Siva said.

    Rhalin stared at the Gate. The once-featureless gray on the far
    side now flickered with complex maps, condensing eons into patterns of
    color. That world had oceans and mountains, cities and deserts, songs
    and equations. It had creatures who loved, feared, suffered, rejoiced.
    It had questions that would never fully be answered within it.

    "Regret?" he said slowly. "I do not know whether to feel guilt or
    pride. We violated a prohibition. We took a universe that would have
    been nothing but eternal emptiness - no events, no experiences - and gave
    it the ability to write a story. But that story includes pain, conflict, extinction, horror as well as beauty. We gave rise to suffering that
    would never have existed otherwise."

    "We also gave rise to joy that would never have existed otherwise,"
    Siva said.

    "The empty manifold did not mind its emptiness," Rhalin replied.
    "It could not. The creatures inside our altered version can mind their suffering. It matters to them in a way that nothing mattered before we interfered."

    Siva was quiet for a long time.

    Finally, she said, "Perhaps the real question is: would they, if
    somehow asked, choose non-existence over existence? Would a being capa-
    ble of asking 'why am I here?' prefer never to have been?"

    "We cannot ask them," Rhalin said. "The Gate does not transmit
    questions. Only observation."

    "Then the question is ours to bear."

    The Smugglers' Reckoning

    The Assembly convened in full, every glyph bright, every silhouette
    sharp.

    "The experiment has run long enough to answer the initial research
    aims," the polyhedron said. "We have seen that the insertion of a single
    mass seed into a null-metric context can generate a cascade of struc-
    ture, including self-referential information-processing systems. The
    manifold is evidently capable of supporting an arbitrarily rich history,
    given such a perturbation."

    "The question before us," the light-band added, "is whether to
    maintain, modify, or terminate the interface."

    Rhalin stiffened. "Terminate? You would collapse their universe?"

    "Not collapse," the light-band said. "We would decouple. Seal the
    Gate permanently. The manifold would continue according to its own dy-
    namics; we simply would no longer watch. Alternatively, more drastic op-
    tions exist, but they are not currently favored."

    "Termination was not part of the original plan," Siva said sharply.
    "We inserted mass knowing that we would create a history. To withdraw
    now as if we had no ongoing responsibility - to pretend our involvement
    ended with the seed - would be . . ."

    "Ethical language is slippery across strata," the polyhedron said
    gently. "What feels like responsibility to you may look like unwarranted attachment to others. We must examine costs and benefits. Our continued observation perturbs our own stratum's causal budget. There are resource implications, however abstract."

    Rhalin ignored the resource argument. "We started this," he said.
    "We cannot now claim that whatever happens is none of our concern. To
    cut the Gate and look away would be an abdication."

    "What do you propose instead?" another observer asked, this one a
    hollow sphere filled with swirling mist. "Continued eternal monitoring?
    For what purpose? They do not know we exist. Their universe is self-con- tained. Our watching changes nothing inside. It may even distort our own priorities here."

    Rhalin looked at Siva.

    "I do not propose anything yet," he said. "But I know that I am not
    ready to treat them as an equation we have solved and can now put back
    on the shelf. There are beings in there now who think and feel. That
    matters, even if we are the only ones for whom it can matter from both
    sides."

    Siva inclined her head. "I agree. We became smugglers when we sent
    mass through the Gate. But we have become witnesses since. That role is
    not costless to abandon."

    The Assembly debated across many channels, time-dilated and parti-
    tioned so that centuries of argument could be compressed into hours for
    Rhalin and Siva.

    In the end, a compromise emerged.

    "We will maintain the interface in a low-bandwidth mode," the poly-
    hedron announced. "Direct monitoring will be reduced. The Gate will
    function as a potential conduit, should future Assemblies decide to act
    more explicitly. For now, our role will be that of distant custodians.
    We will not intrude, but we will also not erase the bridge entirely."

    "Thank you," Rhalin said, realizing how much he had feared the al- ternative.

    Siva exhaled, tension leaving her posture. "So we keep watching.
    Less intensely, but still aware."

    The light-band flickered thoughtfully. "And perhaps, in some far
    future of their internal history, should they develop theories expansive
    enough to include the possibility of external strata, we will revisit
    the question of contact."

    "They may never reach that point," the mist-filled sphere said.
    "Their universe has finite energy, finite time when measured against its
    own scales. They might extinguish themselves or be extinguished by nat-
    ural processes long before they assemble such a theory."

    "That is their story to write," Siva said. "We already wrote the
    first sentence for them. We should not write the last."

    Epilogue: The Echo of Weight

    Years later, in one of the walkers' observatories - a small dome perched
    on a mountain under a crisp, clear sky - a lone figure sat at a desk, surrounded by printouts and screens. She had been working for hours on
    a paper that few of her colleagues would see and fewer still would take seriously.

    She was a theoretical physicist by training, but what she was do-
    ing now skirted the edge of philosophy. She had been struck, ever since graduate school, by the uneasy fact that their equations seemed to allow
    a perfectly empty universe: a null solution with no matter, no fields,
    no fluctuation. A cosmos in which nothing ever happened, not even the
    tiniest blip.

    And yet, that was not the universe she inhabited.

    The question gnawed at her: Why is there something to weigh, in-
    stead of nothing at all?

    Now, in the dim light of her lamp, she wrote:

    "If our fundamental equations admit a fully symmetric, massless so-
    lution that is dynamically sterile, but the actual universe reflects a broken-symmetry, mass-endowed configuration, then it is reasonable to
    ask whether our cosmos is the 'natural' outcome or the result of a se-
    lection event among possible manifolds. The introduction of rest mass
    might be better conceptualized not as an inevitable consequence of the equations, but as a boundary condition extrinsic to the system as we
    model it . . ."

    She paused, tapping the pen against her lip.

    "But extrinsic to what?" she murmured.

    She gazed out the dome's small window at the stars. The sky was
    cold and brilliant, full of the lights of distant aggregates whose exis-
    tence depended on the same asymmetry she was puzzling over.

    "In another possible universe," she whispered, "there is nothing.
    No stars, no planets, no me. Just . . . stillness. Maybe that's the default. And this - " she gestured helplessly at the cosmos - "this is a deviation. Something . . . smuggled in. But by what? Or whom?"

    She knew that, by the standards of her field, this line of thinking
    verged on metaphysics. There would be no experiment to test it, no ob- servation to distinguish a universe with mass given-from-within from one given-from-outside. Still, the question would not leave her.

    She went back to her paper and wrote one last phrase before her ex- haustion forced her to bed:

    "Even if such an extrinsic cause can never be observed from within,
    the mere logical possibility that our universe's mass content represents
    a contingent deviation from a truly empty solution complicates our un- derstanding of 'naturalness.' It raises the unsettling prospect that ex- istence itself may be, in some sense, contraband."

    Far above her mountain, beyond her sky, beyond even the last light
    her instruments could ever hope to see, the Gate hung unnoticed at the
    edge of her cosmos. Its presence had no signature in her detectors. Its alignment with her manifold's geometry remained silently perfect.

    On the other side of the Gate, in the Archive of Forbidden Experi-
    ments, Rhalin stood once more before Vault 7-Nu, watching the low-band-
    width summary of the latest developments in the mass-bearing universe.

    He read the translation of the physicist's paper. It was only one
    thread among billions, barely noticed by her peers. But to him, it
    loomed larger than most.

    "She is reaching for us," he said softly.

    Siva joined him, scanning the same text. "Not quite," she said.
    "She is reaching for an explanation of why her universe has weight. We
    are one such explanation, but not the only one."

    "Does it matter that we are true, even if she will never know?"
    Rhalin asked.

    Siva considered.

    "It matters to us," she said. "We needed to know that emptiness was
    not the only option. We needed to know what happens if you give a uni-
    verse something to weigh. Now we know."

    They fell silent together.

    Through the Gate, their instruments still saw the same thing they
    had seen ever since the seed crossed: a universe in which, for rea-
    sons unknowable from within, mass existed. A universe in which geometry
    curved, stars burned, worlds formed, lives began and ended. A universe
    where, once upon a time in a dimension beyond all their maps, a pair of
    curious beings had smuggled weight into a place that had never known it.

    The null-metric context that might have been remained forever un-
    written, a story-less possibility, an eternal non-happening.

    In its place was this: a cosmos where things fell, where distances changed, where histories accumulated, where someone could sit under a
    lamp on a small mountain and wonder why her equations allowed a universe without mass, yet everything she knew had weight.

    Rhalin turned away from the Gate.

    "Let's keep watching," he said.

    Siva nodded. "As long as their universe carries the burden we gave
    it," she replied, "we owe them at least that much."

    And so the smugglers of weight stood their quiet vigil, outside
    time as their creation knew it, guardians of a secret no mind within
    could ever prove:

    That once, before anything could happen, there was a universe with
    no mass at all - and that everything that followed began with the smallest illegal gift.


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From jdnicoll@jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll) to rec.arts.sf.written on Tue Jan 6 18:33:48 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    In article <Hidden-20260106183020@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>,
    Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
    If there is a better newsgroup for posting AI-generated SF stories,
    please let me know.

    Many desktops locate the recycle bin to the upper left. Simply deposit plagiarism engine slop there, hit recycle, then delete your softare,
    and (if you own it) set fire to the computer. Easy peasy!
    --
    My reviews can be found at http://jamesdavisnicoll.com/
    My tor pieces at https://www.tor.com/author/james-davis-nicoll/
    My Dreamwidth at https://james-davis-nicoll.dreamwidth.org/
    My patreon is at https://www.patreon.com/jamesdnicoll
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Steve Coltrin@spcoltri@omcl.org to rec.arts.sf.written on Tue Jan 6 12:47:26 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    begin fnord
    ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) writes:

    If there is a better newsgroup for posting AI-generated SF stories,
    please let me know.

    alt.test
    --
    Steve Coltrin spcoltri@omcl.org
    "A group known as the League of Human Dignity helped arrange for Deuel
    to be driven to a local livestock scale, where he could be weighed."
    - Associated Press
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Paul S Person@psperson@old.netcom.invalid to rec.arts.sf.written on Wed Jan 7 09:47:38 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    On 6 Jan 2026 17:56:36 GMT, ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote:
    <snippo, answered by others>
    A physics newsgroup had this subject recently, "Hidden dimensions
    could explain where mass comes from", so I asked the chatbot to
    write a story where mass is brought to our universe from a hidden
    dimension. It came out much longer than I expected!
    <snippo meaningless stuff>
    Huh, nothing left.
    I hope they have some mathematical basis for these hidden dimensions
    and are not simply grasping at whatever they can think of in their
    frustration.
    Otherwise, they might just as well be using tiny angelic beings or
    very small unicorns instead. If you are going to make stuff up, why
    not make stuff up that looks neat?
    --
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Bobbie Sellers@bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com to rec.arts.sf.written on Wed Jan 7 10:46:18 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written



    On 1/7/26 09:47, Paul S Person wrote:
    On 6 Jan 2026 17:56:36 GMT, ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote:

    <snippo, answered by others>

    A physics newsgroup had this subject recently, "Hidden dimensions
    could explain where mass comes from", so I asked the chatbot to
    write a story where mass is brought to our universe from a hidden
    dimension. It came out much longer than I expected!

    <snippo meaningless stuff>

    Huh, nothing left.

    I hope they have some mathematical basis for these hidden dimensions
    and are not simply grasping at whatever they can think of in their frustration.

    Of course they have a mathematical basis accounting for
    observations of the energies of decomposing nuclear particles
    thus we have subnuclear particles: i.e. various quarks, muons,
    photons and the particle assumed to be directly responsible for
    mass, the Higgs boson.

    All of these can be accounted for by positing that the energy responsible for mass which is tightly wrapped in the boson is actually
    a dimenion outside of our everyday reckoning of spacial and temporal dimensionality. At one point I believe up to 21 extra dimenions were
    posited to account for the observational data, but I believe it is
    reduced to 11 dimensions these days.
    When I started this little note I could not remember the
    Higgs Boson so I looked it up under, "quest of the supercollider".
    <https://inspirehep.net/literature/2845033>


    Otherwise, they might just as well be using tiny angelic beings or
    very small unicorns instead. If you are going to make stuff up, why
    not make stuff up that looks neat?

    Oh extra dimensions sound very cool to me. So do
    altenative universes, alternative histories, as well as parallel
    universes and histories even those that have universes where
    magic, magical beings, objects and skills exist but I prefer to
    read about them rather than attempt to penetrate the shell
    of this temporal reality. We don't have enough control of
    sufficient amounts of energy to attempt this yet and experiments
    to actualize such concepts should take place away from this
    Solar system in my ever so humble opinion. Because we might
    spawn a new universe in such an attempt and the instrusion of
    such a large mass in this continuum might be quite disruptive.

    bliss - What did the Arisians perceive as enemies?


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From William Hyde@wthyde1953@gmail.com to rec.arts.sf.written on Thu Jan 8 00:15:36 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    Paul S Person wrote:
    On 6 Jan 2026 17:56:36 GMT, ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote:

    <snippo, answered by others>

    A physics newsgroup had this subject recently, "Hidden dimensions
    could explain where mass comes from", so I asked the chatbot to
    write a story where mass is brought to our universe from a hidden
    dimension. It came out much longer than I expected!

    <snippo meaningless stuff>

    Huh, nothing left.

    I hope they have some mathematical basis for these hidden dimensions
    and are not simply grasping at whatever they can think of in their frustration.

    All of these (so far) unconfirmable ideas, supersymmetry and extra
    dimensional theories, have very nice mathematical properties which solve
    many heretofore difficult problems, like infinities that show up in
    equations where they have no right to be. Mind you, if I'd spent my
    career working on supersymmetry I'd be getting pretty antsy about now
    given that we've yet to find a single supersymmetric particle.

    As explained to me by more knowledgeable types, it makes too much sense
    to not be true, but still, I'd be worried.

    The idea of hidden dimensions is not a new one, being proposed first by
    Kaluza in 1921. He showed that if there were a fifth dimension, General Relativity and Electromagnetism could be unified naturally. It is not,
    as polemicists assert, some modern failure of physics.

    I recall being quite irritated when we skipped Kaluza-Klein theory (as
    it has come to be known) in my GR course. My impression was that as
    there was no way of empirically testing it then (as is still the case
    today) our professor regarded it as a mathematically interesting
    curiosity and taught us instead another attempt at a unified field
    theory (his own, as it happens) without any extra dimensions.

    Last I heard of him he was in his eighties and still publishing on GR
    and particle physics. I wonder if he continued to work in 4D, or found
    an extra dimension or seven useful?

    William Hyde

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Gary R. Schmidt@grschmidt@acm.org to rec.arts.sf.written on Thu Jan 8 23:22:27 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    On 07/01/2026 05:33, James Nicoll wrote:
    In article <Hidden-20260106183020@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>,
    Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
    If there is a better newsgroup for posting AI-generated SF stories,
    please let me know.

    Many desktops locate the recycle bin to the upper left. Simply deposit plagiarism engine slop there, hit recycle, then delete your softare,
    and (if you own it) set fire to the computer. Easy peasy!

    What he said.

    But as I'm an Aussie, I'll add, "Fuck off ya dumb fucking cunt."

    Cheers,
    Gary B-)
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From ram@ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) to rec.arts.sf.written on Thu Jan 8 16:01:18 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:
    All of these (so far) unconfirmable ideas, supersymmetry and extra >dimensional theories, have very nice mathematical properties which solve >many heretofore difficult problems, like infinities that show up in >equations where they have no right to be. Mind you, if I'd spent my
    career working on supersymmetry I'd be getting pretty antsy about now
    given that we've yet to find a single supersymmetric particle.

    In regular electrodynamics, if you treat an electron like a
    perfect point, its electric field gets insanely strong the
    closer you get, and the energy in that field just blows up to
    infinity. That basically means the theory breaks down at super
    small scales.

    String theory flips that idea and says that what we call
    "particles" like electrons aren't points at all - they're
    these tiny strings that stretch a bit, so interactions aren't
    happening at one exact spot. That spreads things out and gets
    rid of those nasty infinities.

    When people actually go through the math carefully, they find that
    the theory only fully works if space has extra dimensions beyond
    the usual three, so it ends up living in a higher-dimensional world.

    New results from the Large Hadron Collider in 2025 really threw a
    wrench in supersymmetry. They didn't find any of the new particles
    SUSY was supposed to predict - no heavier versions of known particles,
    even way up in the mass range. So most of the versions of SUSY
    that were meant to fix big physics puzzles, like why particles
    weigh what they do, just don't match what we're seeing anymore.


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Paul S Person@psperson@old.netcom.invalid to rec.arts.sf.written on Thu Jan 8 08:54:11 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 10:46:18 -0800, Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> wrote:


    On 1/7/26 09:47, Paul S Person wrote:
    On 6 Jan 2026 17:56:36 GMT, ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote:

    <snippo, answered by others>

    A physics newsgroup had this subject recently, "Hidden dimensions
    could explain where mass comes from", so I asked the chatbot to
    write a story where mass is brought to our universe from a hidden
    dimension. It came out much longer than I expected!

    <snippo meaningless stuff>

    Huh, nothing left.

    I hope they have some mathematical basis for these hidden dimensions
    and are not simply grasping at whatever they can think of in their
    frustration.

    Of course they have a mathematical basis accounting for
    observations of the energies of decomposing nuclear particles
    thus we have subnuclear particles: i.e. various quarks, muons,
    photons and the particle assumed to be directly responsible for
    mass, the Higgs boson.
    I would bow to your superior knowledge, were it not for the fact that
    "of course" is a statement of belief, not of fact.
    This doesn't mean some physics theories don't have mathematics that
    /require/ different dimensions, though. Or at least are easier to use
    if different dimensions are posited.
    When the Higgs boson was found, it is my understanding that a whole
    lot theories died because it contradicted their predictions. Thus,
    science marches on with the survivors.
    --
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Bobbie Sellers@bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com to rec.arts.sf.written on Thu Jan 8 11:05:50 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written



    On 1/8/26 08:54, Paul S Person wrote:
    On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 10:46:18 -0800, Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> wrote:



    On 1/7/26 09:47, Paul S Person wrote:
    On 6 Jan 2026 17:56:36 GMT, ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote:

    <snippo, answered by others>

    A physics newsgroup had this subject recently, "Hidden dimensions
    could explain where mass comes from", so I asked the chatbot to
    write a story where mass is brought to our universe from a hidden
    dimension. It came out much longer than I expected!

    <snippo meaningless stuff>

    Huh, nothing left.

    I hope they have some mathematical basis for these hidden dimensions
    and are not simply grasping at whatever they can think of in their
    frustration.

    Of course they have a mathematical basis accounting for
    observations of the energies of decomposing nuclear particles
    thus we have subnuclear particles: i.e. various quarks, muons,
    photons and the particle assumed to be directly responsible for
    mass, the Higgs boson.

    I would bow to your superior knowledge, were it not for the fact that
    "of course" is a statement of belief, not of fact.

    This doesn't mean some physics theories don't have mathematics that
    /require/ different dimensions, though. Or at least are easier to use
    if different dimensions are posited.

    When the Higgs boson was found, it is my understanding that a whole
    lot theories died because it contradicted their predictions. Thus,
    science marches on with the survivors.

    New evidence supports changes to and wholly new approximations of the observations. My knowledge may not be superior to your knowlege as I have
    been preoccupied not with the Super Collider results but with the
    mind-bending
    results of the astronomical time travel involved in finding earlier and earlier
    galactic-like formations back at the time which, if the Big Bang theory
    is somewhat
    correct, before the universe allowed the propagation of light or electromagnetic
    radiation to proceed.

    The Universe may not be explicable to the minds attempting it because they
    are the products of the Universe. While clever tools both physical and
    mental are
    employed to study the present and past Universe we do not have as yet
    and may
    never have the capability to understand what the hell is going on in the fullest
    sense. If dimensions beyond our apprehension are involved then it
    becomes even
    harder to understand the Universe.

    bliss
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From kludge@kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) to rec.arts.sf.written on Thu Jan 8 19:53:38 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
    This doesn't mean some physics theories don't have mathematics that
    /require/ different dimensions, though. Or at least are easier to use
    if different dimensions are posited.

    There is a longstanding tradition of this. Many people posited that it
    was much easier to do the math by pretending that the earth actually
    went around the sun instead if the other way around. What got Galileo
    in trouble was claming that it actually did.

    When the Higgs boson was found, it is my understanding that a whole
    lot theories died because it contradicted their predictions. Thus,
    science marches on with the survivors.

    This is how theories go.
    --scott
    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Charles Packer@mailbox@cpacker.org to rec.arts.sf.written on Fri Jan 9 08:47:20 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 19:53:38 -0500 (EST), Scott Dorsey wrote:

    Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
    This doesn't mean some physics theories don't have mathematics that >>/require/ different dimensions, though. Or at least are easier to use if >>different dimensions are posited.

    There is a longstanding tradition of this. Many people posited that it
    was much easier to do the math by pretending that the earth actually
    went around the sun instead if the other way around. What got Galileo
    in trouble was claming that it actually did.


    I hadn't heard this before. Could you identify one of these
    many people or cite a source for the assertion?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From ram@ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) to rec.arts.sf.written on Fri Jan 9 13:24:27 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    Charles Packer <mailbox@cpacker.org> wrote or quoted:
    On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 19:53:38 -0500 (EST), Scott Dorsey wrote:
    There is a longstanding tradition of this. Many people posited that it
    was much easier to do the math by pretending that the earth actually
    went around the sun instead if the other way around. What got Galileo
    in trouble was claming that it actually did.
    I hadn't heard this before. Could you identify one of these
    many people or cite a source for the assertion?

    The heliocentric model basically goes back to Copernicus, a few
    decades before Galileo, but Galileo's the one who really got
    it out there. Before that, people had tossed around ideas that
    kinda pointed in that direction, but the lack of parallax from
    the fixed stars seemed to argue against it.

    In the geocentric model, they used epicycles to explain the paths
    planets seemed to take, but those weren't always seen as real
    physical things - more like math tools to make the system work out.
    (Also see the end of the quotation below for this.)

    Even in the heliocentric setup, before Kepler came along with his
    ellipses, you still needed epicycles to make the numbers line up.

    Here's a quote with a source that doesn't mention any Greek ideas
    about heliocentrism in the sense of "easier to do the math by
    pretending that the earth actually went around the sun":

    |This was so since after the Pythagorean school Greek astronomy became
    |less purely speculative and more scientific. Eudoxus (409-336 B. C.) |presented the first mathematical theory of celestial appearances. He
    |tried to construct a theory of celestial motions out of uniform circu-
    |lar motions which should agree with observations. He imagined the fixed
    |stars to be on a vault of heaven; and the sun, moon and planets to be
    |upon similar vaults or spheres, 26 revolving spheres in all, the motion
    |of each planet being resolved into its components, and a separate sphere |being assigned for each component motion. Callippus (330) increased the |number of spheres to thirty-three. The real existence of the spheres was
    |not suggested, but the idea was only a mathematical conception to facil- |itate the construction of tables for predicting the places of the heav-
    |enly bodies.
    |
    "The early history of the theory of eccentrics and epicycles"
    (1917) - Noel Sargent.

    This whole text ("The early history of . . .") doesn't show
    any sign of heliocentrism being used as a calculation tool,
    at least up until Copernicus.


    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From kludge@kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) to rec.arts.sf.written on Fri Jan 9 09:37:57 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    Charles Packer <mailbox@cpacker.org> wrote:
    On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 19:53:38 -0500 (EST), Scott Dorsey wrote:

    Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
    This doesn't mean some physics theories don't have mathematics that >>>/require/ different dimensions, though. Or at least are easier to use if >>>different dimensions are posited.

    There is a longstanding tradition of this. Many people posited that it
    was much easier to do the math by pretending that the earth actually
    went around the sun instead if the other way around. What got Galileo
    in trouble was claming that it actually did.


    I hadn't heard this before. Could you identify one of these
    many people or cite a source for the assertion?

    Well, Copernicus is the obvious answer to that one, but a number of folks followed him.
    --scott
    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Paul S Person@psperson@old.netcom.invalid to rec.arts.sf.written on Fri Jan 9 08:24:08 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 11:05:50 -0800, Bobbie Sellers <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> wrote:


    On 1/8/26 08:54, Paul S Person wrote:
    On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 10:46:18 -0800, Bobbie Sellers
    <bliss-sf4ever@dslextreme.com> wrote:



    On 1/7/26 09:47, Paul S Person wrote:
    <snippo, hidden dimensions>
    I hope they have some mathematical basis for these hidden dimensions
    and are not simply grasping at whatever they can think of in their
    frustration.

    Of course they have a mathematical basis accounting for
    observations of the energies of decomposing nuclear particles
    thus we have subnuclear particles: i.e. various quarks, muons,
    photons and the particle assumed to be directly responsible for
    mass, the Higgs boson.

    I would bow to your superior knowledge, were it not for the fact that
    "of course" is a statement of belief, not of fact.

    This doesn't mean some physics theories don't have mathematics that
    /require/ different dimensions, though. Or at least are easier to use
    if different dimensions are posited.

    When the Higgs boson was found, it is my understanding that a whole
    lot theories died because it contradicted their predictions. Thus,
    science marches on with the survivors.

    New evidence supports changes to and wholly new approximations of the
    observations. My knowledge may not be superior to your knowlege as I have >been preoccupied not with the Super Collider results but with the >mind-bending
    results of the astronomical time travel involved in finding earlier and >earlier
    galactic-like formations back at the time which, if the Big Bang theory
    is somewhat
    correct, before the universe allowed the propagation of light or >electromagnetic
    radiation to proceed.
    I'm not sure what the first bit is saying. The initial report in
    /Science News/ noted that several theories were now falsified.
    That's how science works, BTW: falsified theories are dropped,
    theories that survive the test keep on trucking. Of course, falsified
    theories can also be adjusted in some cases to match the results of
    the test ("match" here meaning "be compatible with"). And results can
    always be refined.
    The rest, so far, appears to be compatible with articles I have read
    in /Science News/. Most of them report great excitement at the
    results.
    The Universe may not be explicable to the minds attempting it because they
    are the products of the Universe. While clever tools both physical and >mental are
    employed to study the present and past Universe we do not have as yet
    and may
    never have the capability to understand what the hell is going on in the >fullest
    sense. If dimensions beyond our apprehension are involved then it
    becomes even
    harder to understand the Universe.
    The trailer to /The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms/ has an
    intelligent-looking white woman saying "perhaps there with things we
    were never meant to know". I don't see that applying that attitude
    (which is ultimately religious: it is always God who never meant us to
    know or do various things when this sort of statement appears) is
    either necessary or relevant here.
    What is important is to keep in mind that we have exactly /one/
    universe to study, and it is not something we created to study. This
    does indeed make things difficult.
    In one of his later novels, Asimov has a ship searching for the
    original planet Earth. But there is a problem: all solar systems look
    the same: rocky planets inward, gas giants outward, spaced -- well,
    spaced pretty much as ours are.
    The reason for this is that that /was/ the scientific theory at the
    time the book was written: since we had only one Solar System to
    study, every Solar System was taken to come to be in the same pattern.
    What else could possibly happen. (In the book, the rings of Saturn
    were claimed to be a unique marker for our Solar System).
    When the first exoplanet was discovered some time later, this theory
    died, at least insofar as it pretended to predict what other Solar
    Systems were like. It still works as well as ever (or has been updated
    to keep it working) for our Solar System, of course.
    So let's put the cart /after/ the horse: first we make our
    observations, then we correct our theory. Any other approach is
    religion, not science.
    --
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Paul S Person@psperson@old.netcom.invalid to rec.arts.sf.written on Fri Jan 9 08:28:58 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 19:53:38 -0500 (EST), kludge@panix.com (Scott
    Dorsey) wrote:
    Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
    This doesn't mean some physics theories don't have mathematics that >>/require/ different dimensions, though. Or at least are easier to use
    if different dimensions are posited.

    There is a longstanding tradition of this. Many people posited that it
    was much easier to do the math by pretending that the earth actually
    went around the sun instead if the other way around. What got Galileo
    in trouble was claming that it actually did.
    I thought Galileo also offended by claiming that various "celestial
    bodies", allegedly made of the Fifth Element, were in fact very large
    rocks, made of the mundane elements (Earth, Air, Fire, Water).
    --
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Paul S Person@psperson@old.netcom.invalid to rec.arts.sf.written on Fri Jan 9 08:41:40 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Fri, 9 Jan 2026 08:47:20 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer
    <mailbox@cpacker.org> wrote:
    On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 19:53:38 -0500 (EST), Scott Dorsey wrote:

    Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
    This doesn't mean some physics theories don't have mathematics that >>>/require/ different dimensions, though. Or at least are easier to use if >>>different dimensions are posited.

    There is a longstanding tradition of this. Many people posited that it
    was much easier to do the math by pretending that the earth actually
    went around the sun instead if the other way around. What got Galileo
    in trouble was claming that it actually did.


    I hadn't heard this before. Could you identify one of these
    many people or cite a source for the assertion?
    Bing is your friend! <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism>.
    If you insist on the Earth revolving around the Sun, then Aristarchus
    of Samos may have been the first (3rd century BC).
    If you are willing to replace the Sun with a "mystical" central fire,
    then the Greek philosophers Philolaus and Hicetas are cited.
    The volume of the set known as The Great Books of the Western World
    devoted to astronomy includes Ptolemy, Copernicus and Kepler (Newton
    is in a later volume). There is an essay between Ptolemy and
    Copernicus that points out that, if you take Plato's description of
    the demiurge forming the planets around the central fire and compare
    the ratios of their distances from such fire to the ratios of the mean
    distance of the actual planets from the Sun, they agree well enough to
    suggest that Plato is, in fact, a heliocentrist.
    BTW, Copernicus did simplify Ptolemy to the extent that one less
    circle was needed for each of the other planets (not the Sun -- it has
    none, being at the center; not the Earth -- it had none in Ptolemy).
    So, yes, the computations are a bit reduced.
    It was Kepler who found that, if the Sun had an as-yet undiscovered
    force, it could keep the planets moving around it in ellipses.
    It was Newton who found that force in gravity.
    Ptolemy, BTW, was merely following Aristotle, who insisted that the
    Earth was at the center and that only circular movement could be
    eternal.
    --
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From William Hyde@wthyde1953@gmail.com to rec.arts.sf.written on Fri Jan 9 16:49:56 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    Stefan Ram wrote:
    William Hyde <wthyde1953@gmail.com> wrote or quoted:
    All of these (so far) unconfirmable ideas, supersymmetry and extra
    dimensional theories, have very nice mathematical properties which solve
    many heretofore difficult problems, like infinities that show up in
    equations where they have no right to be. Mind you, if I'd spent my
    career working on supersymmetry I'd be getting pretty antsy about now
    given that we've yet to find a single supersymmetric particle.

    In regular electrodynamics, if you treat an electron like a
    perfect point, its electric field gets insanely strong the
    closer you get, and the energy in that field just blows up to
    infinity. That basically means the theory breaks down at super
    small scales.

    Long ago I attended a lecture by one of the founders of string theory on
    work he and others did circa 1970.

    This work involved replacing point particles in calculations with their diameters in all calculations, thus giving them length, if still zero
    volume. This resulted in infinities that were easier to handle. How
    this evolved into today's string theory I do not know.

    But the infinities I had in mind are those which show up in quantum
    field theory. I can recall learning transport theory in solid state.
    All looks well, there's the equation, there's a reasonable formulation
    for energy transport but ... at the far right of the equation is a term
    that sums to infinity. Get rid of that term and you have a useful
    equation, but that's rather unsatisfactory. Given supersymmetry,
    however, that term vanishes neatly due, IIRC (and I probably don't) to cancellations from a sea of virtual sypersymmetric particles).



    String theory flips that idea and says that what we call
    "particles" like electrons aren't points at all - they're
    these tiny strings that stretch a bit, so interactions aren't
    happening at one exact spot. That spreads things out and gets
    rid of those nasty infinities.

    When people actually go through the math carefully, they find that
    the theory only fully works if space has extra dimensions beyond
    the usual three, so it ends up living in a higher-dimensional world.

    New results from the Large Hadron Collider in 2025 really threw a
    wrench in supersymmetry. They didn't find any of the new particles
    SUSY was supposed to predict - no heavier versions of known particles,
    even way up in the mass range. So most of the versions of SUSY
    that were meant to fix big physics puzzles, like why particles
    weigh what they do, just don't match what we're seeing anymore.

    As I said. I'd be worried.

    The theory works to well for it to be utterly useless, but it seems that something is seriously wrong, or seriously incomplete.

    The nice thing about working with ice sheets is that you know they exist.

    William Hyde

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From kludge@kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) to rec.arts.sf.written on Fri Jan 9 19:28:49 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
    I thought Galileo also offended by claiming that various "celestial
    bodies", allegedly made of the Fifth Element, were in fact very large
    rocks, made of the mundane elements (Earth, Air, Fire, Water).

    Yes, although to be clear I don't think he actually said it was absolutely
    true that this was the case, he only suggested that it was a possibility.

    Later on the idea that the heavens were made of ordinary materials and
    follow the same physical laws as here on earth turned out to be a huge
    winner for Newton.

    Of course, another way to look at this is that we're all made up of
    star stuff from the heavens. This seems a better approach personally.
    --scott
    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Charles Packer@mailbox@cpacker.org to rec.arts.sf.written on Sat Jan 10 08:35:44 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Fri, 9 Jan 2026 09:37:57 -0500 (EST), Scott Dorsey wrote:

    Charles Packer <mailbox@cpacker.org> wrote:
    On Thu, 8 Jan 2026 19:53:38 -0500 (EST), Scott Dorsey wrote:

    Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
    This doesn't mean some physics theories don't have mathematics that >>>>/require/ different dimensions, though. Or at least are easier to use >>>>if different dimensions are posited.

    There is a longstanding tradition of this. Many people posited that
    it was much easier to do the math by pretending that the earth
    actually went around the sun instead if the other way around. What
    got Galileo in trouble was claming that it actually did.


    I hadn't heard this before. Could you identify one of these many people
    or cite a source for the assertion?

    Well, Copernicus is the obvious answer to that one, but a number of
    folks followed him.
    --scott

    Of course I know about Copernicus, but he didn't just "pretend"
    heliocentrism; he proposed it as an actual fact, didn't he?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From kludge@kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) to rec.arts.sf.written on Sat Jan 10 09:39:16 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    Charles Packer <mailbox@cpacker.org> wrote:

    Of course I know about Copernicus, but he didn't just "pretend" >heliocentrism; he proposed it as an actual fact, didn't he?

    You know, I have never read Copernicus' book. I probably should.

    Galileo may or may not have been certain about heliocentrism personally,
    but what with the Pope and all what he said in public was kind of guarded.
    But not guarded enough. And I gather that he was kind of an ass which did
    not help matters.
    --scott
    --
    "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Don@g@crcomp.net to rec.arts.sf.written on Sat Jan 10 14:54:33 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    Charles Packer wrote:
    Scott Dorsey wrote:
    Charles Packer wrote:
    Scott Dorsey wrote:
    Paul S Person wrote:
    This doesn't mean some physics theories don't have mathematics that >>>>>/require/ different dimensions, though. Or at least are easier to use >>>>>if different dimensions are posited.

    There is a longstanding tradition of this. Many people posited that
    it was much easier to do the math by pretending that the earth
    actually went around the sun instead if the other way around. What
    got Galileo in trouble was claming that it actually did.

    I hadn't heard this before. Could you identify one of these many people >>>or cite a source for the assertion?

    Well, Copernicus is the obvious answer to that one, but a number of
    folks followed him.
    --scott

    Of course I know about Copernicus, but he didn't just "pretend" heliocentrism; he proposed it as an actual fact, didn't he?

    It's my understanding Galileo's brouhaha began with a lack of evidence.
    A pamphlet from my Catholic church says it this way:

    There is no evidence that, when Galileo acceded to the
    Inquisition's demand that he formally renounce the view
    that the Earth moves, he muttered under his breath,
    eppur si muove, "but still it moves." What continues to
    move, despite the historical evidence, is the legend of
    a fundamental conflict between science and religion.
    There was a conflict between Galileo and the Inquisition,
    but it was a conflict between those who shared common
    first principles about the nature of scientific truth
    and the complementarity between science and religion.
    In the absence of scientific knowledge that the Earth
    moves, Galileo was required to affirm that it did not.
    However unwise it was to insist on such a requirement,
    the Inquisition did not ask Galileo to choose between
    science and faith.

    GALILEO by Carroll

    Another Catholic says it this way:

    Scientism and the Galileo myth. Another example of 'The Science'
    and its mendacity and propaganda.

    The Religion of The Science, or Scientism, does not suffer
    competitors or doubts.

    ... According to our modern education hagiography, the following is
    'true' about Galilei Galileo:

    1. Proved heliocentricity (it took some 200 hundred years after
    Galileo, before some proofs were offered, namely stellar
    parallax and light aberration which can also be explained by
    the Tychonic model, as covered in other posts)
    2. Invented the telescope
    3. Discovered Sunspots
    4. Identified comets
    5. Dropped weights from the leaning tower of Pisa proving the
    'law' of accelerated gravity
    6. Invented the incline plane to prove that an object falling
    down an incline will roll up an incline for the same distance
    as the declination
    7. Discovered the important properties of a pendulum
    8. Based on the pendulum discovered time keeping
    9. Was the first to push 'experimental sciencerCO

    Busy guy.-a Except that none of the above is true (Kuhn, p. 10).
    Galileo did not invent the telescope and his customised production
    was largely inferior to that of Kepler's.-a He did not prove
    heliocentricity whatsoever (more below).-a It is unlikely he
    performed the weight dropping experiment, nor did he discover the
    attributes of a swinging pendulum, the incline motion of an object
    proceeding from a declination; nor did he uncover secrets leading
    to time keeping or navigation.

    Christopher Scheiner discovered Sunspots.-a Jesuits long before
    Galileo had traced and explained the life cycle of comets, contrary
    to Galileo's claim that they were ephemeral.-a Scientific
    experimentation using defined methods dates to at least the 12th
    century. Galileo was the same character who yelled and pounded his
    desk that the moon had an atmosphere. It doesnrCOt and if you landed
    on it, you wouldnrCOt survive more than 10 minutes due to radiation
    exposure. ...

    A key factor which hindered Galileo was a personality which though
    innovative, was too often narcissistic, egocentric, stubborn,
    rough and imprudent. -aThis was true in his general disregard for
    others and their opinions throughout his career.-a This usually
    generates more enemies than friends. ...

    <https://unstabbinated.substack.com/p/scientism-and-the-galileo-myth-another>

    In my humble opinion the Catholic church's empirical guardrails help
    keep scientific inquiry on track. Without empirical guardrails you end
    up with fantastical god particles, for instance.
    THE HIGGS FAKE by Unzicker tells the tale of the god particle's
    aimless inception. In a nutshell, Unzicker blames the stagnation of
    particle physics since Einstein's annus mirabilis on too much math and
    too little empiricism.

    Danke,

    --
    Don.......My cat's )\._.,--....,'``. https://crcomp.net/reviews.php telltale tall tail /, _.. \ _\ (`._ ,. veritas liberabit vos
    tells tall tales.. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' Make 1984 fiction again.

    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Paul S Person@psperson@old.netcom.invalid to rec.arts.sf.written on Sat Jan 10 08:59:05 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Sat, 10 Jan 2026 08:35:44 -0000 (UTC), Charles Packer
    <mailbox@cpacker.org> wrote:
    On Fri, 9 Jan 2026 09:37:57 -0500 (EST), Scott Dorsey wrote:
    <snippo>
    Of course I know about Copernicus, but he didn't just "pretend" >heliocentrism; he proposed it as an actual fact, didn't he?
    IIRC from my reading it quite a while back, he presented it more as a demonstration that a heliocentric system would be simpler than
    Ptolomy. He and others may, of course, have believed it, but that's
    not the same as presented it as an actual fact.
    And he carefully arranged to have it published /after/ he died,
    considering it very unlikely that the Holy Office would be able to do
    anything to him after he was dead.
    --
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Paul S Person@psperson@old.netcom.invalid to rec.arts.sf.written on Sat Jan 10 09:06:06 2026
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.sf.written

    On Fri, 9 Jan 2026 19:28:49 -0500 (EST), kludge@panix.com (Scott
    Dorsey) wrote:
    Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
    I thought Galileo also offended by claiming that various "celestial >>bodies", allegedly made of the Fifth Element, were in fact very large >>rocks, made of the mundane elements (Earth, Air, Fire, Water).

    Yes, although to be clear I don't think he actually said it was absolutely >true that this was the case, he only suggested that it was a possibility. While he was still alive.
    Copernicus avoided the problem: he arranged to have his book published
    after he died and so was beyond the reach of the Holy Office.
    Later on the idea that the heavens were made of ordinary materials and
    follow the same physical laws as here on earth turned out to be a huge
    winner for Newton.
    Aristotle's Fifth Element was based on the idea that the Sun etc were
    gods, and gods were immortal. Since he also believed that the reason
    mundane things were not mortal (ie, everything breaks down/dies at
    some poing) was because they were compounded of for elements, the only explanation could be that they were made of a Fifth Element alone.
    Aristotle was very big in Roman Catholic theology, particularly (IIRC)
    with the time of and after Aquinas.
    Of course, another way to look at this is that we're all made up of
    star stuff from the heavens. This seems a better approach personally.
    We also have a lot more than 4 elements. Even if you regard "elements"
    as quarks and leptons, there are still 3x as many.
    --
    "Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
    Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
    Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2